It is NOT a "cult" to see the effects and be backed by scientific consensus, along with a good education in a number of sciences and math subjects.More to the definition of cult would be denialists who resort to using old reports and other BS to continue an argument won long ago.THIS is more important, from my "How to mitigate CC" thread; viewtopic.php?f=3&t=24584

>>>>"It would take an act of phenomenal legerdemain to conceal the fact that climate change - or rather >>the failure to act on climate change when it was still largely preventable<< - is the greatest security failure in human history. Despite more than >>25 years of explicit warnings from the world's best climate scientists<<, the amount of greenhouse gases (GHG) being pumped into the atmosphere continues to rise. In fact, >>60 percent of the total has been dumped there since the danger was known.<<"<<<<<<

}}Webster's 'legerdemain'_____sleigh of hand{{{

It is a moral decision to go green;"Scans suggest how the mind solves ethical dilemmasBrain region balances competing interests in moral judgmentsby Laura Sanders9:15am, March 26, 2014Deciding whether to kill one person to save five is a true brain teaser. A study in the March 26 Journal of Neuroscience describes the neural tug-of-war that results in a moral decision.Cognitive neuroscientists Amitai Shenhav of Princeton University and Joshua Greene of Harvard University asked 35 people to weigh in on 48 wrenching scenarios while undergoing functional MRI brain scans. The researchers used scenarios akin to the famous trolley choice: The hypothetical dilemma forces a person to decide whether to push an innocent man to his death to stop a runaway trolley from killing five people." https://www.sciencenews.org/article/sca ... 3-93287133

_________________"With every decision, think seven generations ahead of the consequences of your actions" Ute rule of life.“We do not inherit the earth from our ancestors; we borrow it from our children”― Chief Seattle“Those Who Have the Privilege to Know Have the Duty to Act”…Albert Einstein

Comment on a report that has yet to be released? That is generally called a creation of fantasy since there is nothing to confirm the "draft" is actually being used or was actually a draft being considered.

Milton Banana wrote:

Fence sitters it looks like the IPCC is walking it back a bit. Seem credibility is on their meager little minds of late. This will no doubt anger the Cultists.

The report may irritate politicians in poor countries who look to blame climate change caused by the rich world for the ills of their people and want to demand reparations. But it may also dismay those who want to cite other factors to “prove” that climate change is never to blame. The world is more complicated, the scientists who prepared the draft conclude. The lesson of their report is that climate change will be implicated in a vast array of global ills, but it will rarely be the sole cause.

Quote:

The 2007 report was almost all about the impacts of climate change. Most of this report, and in particular most of the summary for policymakers, is about resilience and adaptation to inevitable climate change.

Could this be the beginning of the IPCC understanding the natural variability of climate?

Quote:

Some nightmare scenarios are robustly defused. Past IPCC reports have warned that there might be as many as 50 million “climate refugees” around the world, who will flee drought, rising tides and spreading deserts. This report is set to dismiss that idea.

Dismissing doomsday scenarios? If this continues no doubt the Cultists will throw these people overboard too.

Quote:

Global warming is said to be threatening thousands of animal and plant species with extinction. That, at least, is what the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has been predicting for years.

But the UN climate body now says it is no longer so certain. The second part of the IPCC’s new assessment report is due to be presented next Monday in Yokohama, Japan. On the one hand, a classified draft of the report notes that a further “increased extinction risk for a substantial number of species during and beyond the 21st century” is to be expected. On the other hand, the IPCC admits that there is no evidence climate change has led to even a single species becoming extinct thus far.

Another huge back track from previous reports. The Cultist are not going to be happy with this. This means one and only one thing. Fund raising must be suffering as a result of past extremist reports.

Quote:

If the leaked draft is reflected in the published report, it will constitute the formal moving on of the debate from the past, futile focus upon “mitigation” to a new debate about resilience and adaptation.

Translation. We're getting our ass kicked the way we have framed this debate. We must reframe the debate and try again.

_________________With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none” Arthur Schopenhauer

"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."Albert Einstein

The 2007 report was almost all about the impacts of climate change. Most of this report, and in particular most of the summary for policymakers, is about resilience and adaptation to inevitable climate change.

Could this be the beginning of the IPCC understanding the natural variability of climate?

More likely the realization that folks like Milton have caused sufficient delays in action to prevent mitigation of the effect on climate change so all we have left is to try to try to make the changes and adapt as well as possible to what we have brought upon ourselves.

_________________With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none” Arthur Schopenhauer

"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."Albert Einstein

Snowy I've been checking in. Derek would really like to talk you. He finds it odd and disappointing you never once mentioned you're change of heart to him or anyone else. He would really like to talk to you about this paragraph.

Quote:

I know that Derek doesn't believe there is any sort of Greenhouse effect at all, and I find that viewpoint to not be scientifically backed up. I believe he is part of the "Slaying the Sky Dragon" folks. Anthony Watts did an excellent demonstration where he disproved one of the Slayer's claims observationally. He makes an excellent point at the end. He says, "And it makes you wonder, if they get something as simple as this wrong, what about the rest of their science?"

I don't think I have posted at that forum in at least two or so years, and I don't plan on posting there anytime soon. The Greenhouse Effect is simply basic physics. Nothing more, nothing less. More downward longwave radiation has been observed in response to increasing greenhouse gases, and Greenhouse Gases absorb longwave radiation at wavelengths corresponding to the wavelengths at which heat radiates from Earth. This in turn slows the rate at which Earth cools, and you get net warming overall.

Well than who ever you are I don’t know just what to do with you. You have stated in the past you were a true believer. Then you looked at the evidence and became a skeptic. Then you completely turned around and now profess to be a believer. I can't believe that this kind of intellectual gymnastics is possible. You are either very young and are not sure what you believe. One possibility I have not ruled out yet is a disingenuous fabrication.

Snowlover123 once wrote this....

Quote:

Snowlover123 Wrote: They are indeed very vicious. I actually sent a private message to Fabian on the other board that I would be leaving the forum.

The attacks on me personally were so traumatic, that I really could not take much more of it.

Snowlover complained about the ad hominem attacks he was subject to on another board. Now fence sitters many of the members on this board Snowlover123 complained about are here on this board now. These attacks were personally so traumatic that Snowlover123 doubted if he could take more of it. Now I’m to believe Snowlover would side with and help some of those who he himself described as being "very vicious" and abused and traumatized him? I just don’t trust many things about the appearance of this "personality" here at this time.

Well than who ever you are I don’t know just what to do with you. You have stated in the past you were a true believer. Then you looked at the evidence and became a skeptic. Then you completely turned around and now profess to be a believer. I can't believe that this kind of intellectual gymnastics is possible. You are either very young and are not sure what you believe, or as I suspect a disingenuous fabrication.

Snowlover123 once wrote this....

Quote:

Snowlover123 Wrote: They are indeed very vicious. I actually sent a private message to Fabian on the other board that I would be leaving the forum.

The attacks on me personally were so traumatic, that I really could not take much more of it.

Snowlover complained about the ad hominem attacks he was subject to on another board. These attacks were personally so traumatic that Snowlover123 doubted if he could take more of it. Now I’m to believe Snowlover would side with and help some of those who he himself described as being "very vicious" and abused and traumatized him? I just don’t trust many things about the appearance of this "personality" here at this time.

When the truth is not what you want to believe always go for the conspiracy theory. .......

_________________With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none” Arthur Schopenhauer

"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."Albert Einstein

Sorry Wayne I'm not buying this. I suppose it adds up from a psychological stand point of the abused desperately seeking validation from those who abused him, but that would work only if he actually knew the people involved. He doesn't. Three forums in question here are anonymous formats so this behavior isn’t logical. I don’t know fence sitters this just gets more and more curious. This just doesn't add up.

I am in fact a "lukewarmer" on AGW... meaning that I believe that Climate Change is mostly natural, so I expect some grievance out of that...

-Snowlover

"I am new here, and I hope to learn everyone here soon!"I knew this board was a condensed version of the old Environment Site when it closed down with many of the same cast of characters as Snowlover123 would have known too. This just adds more questions and inconsistencies to the story.

And, this was Snowlover123's signature line on the board the "personality" here refuses to return too.

I am in fact a "lukewarmer" on AGW... meaning that I believe that Climate Change is mostly natural, so I expect some grievance out of that...

-Snowlover

"I am new here, and I hope to learn everyone here soon!"I knew this board was a condensed version of the old Environment Site with many of the same cast of characters as Snowlover123 would have known too. This just adds more questions and incongruities to the story.

You know as much about this as you do climate science, which is zilch. This board is older than TES and had some of the sqme posters before they posted on TES.

The mark of a true scientist is to follow the evidence and while Snowy was a significant doubter at one time, the evidence has continued to mount to the point where he had to change his view. Much like the Berkely Earth study experienced after so much of the data was reviewed.

Quote:

And, this was Snowlover123's signature line on the board the "personality" here refuses to return too.

Only a fool makes up their mind and refuses to allow new data to be used, which seems to be an appropriate description of Milton given the shock that people can change their views with the influx of more/new data. That is how science works, but the politician just keeps on claiming their idea was always best even when the new data refutes that claim.

_________________With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none” Arthur Schopenhauer

"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."Albert Einstein

Well than who ever you are I don’t know just what to do with you. You have stated in the past you were a true believer. Then you looked at the evidence and became a skeptic. Then you completely turned around and now profess to be a believer. I can't believe that this kind of intellectual gymnastics is possible. You are either very young and are not sure what you believe. One possibility I have not ruled out yet is a disingenuous fabrication.

Snowlover123 once wrote this....

Quote:

Snowlover123 Wrote: They are indeed very vicious. I actually sent a private message to Fabian on the other board that I would be leaving the forum.

The attacks on me personally were so traumatic, that I really could not take much more of it.

Snowlover complained about the ad hominem attacks he was subject to on another board. Now fence sitters many of the members on this board Snowlover123 complained about are here on this board now. These attacks were personally so traumatic that Snowlover123 doubted if he could take more of it. Now I’m to believe Snowlover would side with and help some of those who he himself described as being "very vicious" and abused and traumatized him? I just don’t trust many things about the appearance of this "personality" here at this time.

Once again, I've already explained that yes I did get personal attacks from people on TES. Some of them were indeed vile. That's why I wanted to become a moderator, and stop that kind of stuff from being so freely posted. However I'm not going to look at the evidence from a biased point of view just because of that.

People can change. I'm not sure why that's so hard for you to believe.

An estimated 4.5 million UK homes are living in fuel poverty and the Government is not doing enough to tackle the crisis, according to a report

Quote:

The UK Fuel Poverty Monitor (FPM) those living in Northern Ireland, Wales and Scotland were more likely to struggle with fuel poverty but they also had greater access to energy efficiency measures.

The average investment on energy efficiency programmes for low income households in England was just £3.52 per electricity customer, compared to £36.48 in Scotland, £31.31 in Wales and £27.55 in Northern Ireland, the report stated.

Homes eligible for assistance with insulation and other energy saving costs were not receiving it because the measures were too costly or potential customers were being asked for a contribution they could not afford, FPM said.

More than two million children are "growing up cold" in England, according to new figures released today, as a poll suggests that UK parents are sacrificing buying family essentials in order to heat their homes.

Sorry fence sitters. I'm not going to just quietly march off to the gulag like a good little cultist. How about you?

Okay fence sitters I'm not going to waste another instant on this inside baseball stuff.

I do not blame you. If I were you I would not want anyone to know that rational people who look at the data can see there is a problem that has been building for a long time. I too would stick to telling them to look at whatever tilted view you could present, but first have them tilt their heads to the correct angle and squint their eyes just right to see what you want them to see. I am fortunate that I am not you because that would not be pleasant for me. I am too fond of factual evidence and the truth to turn to misrepresentation to try to keep the few skeptic fews alive I could. Of course, the job will continue to get harder each year as more and more impacts affect us all.

_________________With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none” Arthur Schopenhauer

"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."Albert Einstein

Yet the leaked report makes the extraordinary concession that over the past 15 years, recorded world temperatures have increased at only a quarter of the rate of IPCC claimed when it published its last assessment in 2007.

Back then, it said observed warming over the 15 years from 1990-2005 had taken place at a rate of 0.2C per decade, and it predicted this would continue for the following 20 years, on the basis of forecasts made by computer climate models.

But the new report says the observed warming over the more recent 15 years to 2012 was just 0.05C per decade - below almost all computer predictions.

GIGO. Fence sitters this is a stunning admission that IPCC and current climate models are seriously flawed. And, I suspect this story still whitewashes the real short comings of this "climate research" technique. And, that's 11,000 hits fence sitters.

“Ridiculous claims—like the science is settled or the debate is over—triggered a growing realization that something was wrong.” When the global warming advocates began to tell people that cooling is caused by warming, the public has realized how absurd the entire UN climate change argument has been.

Worse, however, has been “the deliberate deceptions, misinformation, manipulation of records and misapplying scientific method and research” to pursue a political objective. Much of this is clearly unlawful, but it is unlikely that any of those who perpetrated the hoax will ever be punished and, in the case of Al Gore and the IPCC, they shared a Nobel Peace Prize!

We are all in debt to Dr. Ball and a score of his fellow scientists who exposed the lies and debunked the hoax; their numbers are growing with thousands of scientists signing petitions and participating in international conferences to expose this massive global deception.

The cultist will no doubt have their fingers in their ears shouting their usual bilge. Rise above that fence sitters.